I wonder why the Independent didnt get IpsosMori to ask whether the public new by how much government spending had been cut since the recession started*? Or how much income inequality had changed since then#?

Hetan Shah, executive director of the Royal Statistical Society, said: "Our data poses real challenges for policymakers. How can you develop good policy when public perceptions can be so out of kilter with the evidence?

Eh, how can it 'pose a real challenge for policymakers'.......surely that's the whole point - to deliberately misinform the public so that their opinions can be manipulated in such a way that they think/vote correctly ?

For example, as long as they don't realise that tax fraud is a problem 5 times a bigger than benefit fraud, then the public will carry on supporting the Tory/Daily Mail agenda.

Hardly a problem for those who hold the wealth, power, and influence, in our society.

I wonder why the Independent didnt get IpsosMori to ask whether the public new by how much government spending had been cut since the recession started*?

The survey was commissioned by the Royal Statistical Society and King's College London, not the Independent.

Covering up the fact that they haven't cut government spending would be an aim of the Tory government today, as it was when Thatcher was PM. Very few people realise that government spending went up under Thatcher as the result of a successful and careful manipulation of the news by the Tories and the media, most people think government spending went down under Thatcher.

Ernie, I have consistently tried my best to inform folk here about gov spending under mrs t and other Tory governments. And what do I get for it - being called a swivel eyed Tory loon!!

I feel your pain.

However if Thatcher and her ministers had proudly and publicly informed the British people how they had increased public spending, rather than cut it, then the British people would have been better informed.

I wonder why they didn't do that ? Do you think they regretted not telling the British people afterwards ?

And why aren't Cameron and Osborne today telling the electorate loud and clear that they haven't cut public spending ? Surely they don't want people to be "misled" ?

Spend has gone up under Gideon as it did under thatcher but is being spent on the consequences of their ideology- increased welfare to pay people to be unemployed. not on good stuff I.e. investment for the future such as infrastructure and training because you can't have an interventionist industrial policy. absolutely not. no. Also much of that public spend is being transferred to a smaller and smaller number of private individuals.

Thatcher spaffed the North Sea oil legacy on long term disability payments to massage the unemployed figures.

It's ok though as our house prices will inflate us out if public debt soon anyway. Nothing can go wrong there.

Do I really need to explain real terms to you and the fact they keep cutting budgets and making folk redundant

Perhaps you could post up what they were going to spend pre cuts - you know budgret projections and all that.
Fllow this with
What no change would be in real terms
What the actual cut is given the above.
Poor and from an expert as well

Or how much income inequality had changed since then#?

Perhaps you should explain how it is calculated ?
Any drop in the average income alters poverty [ due to how it is calculated] so a person can have less money than last year [ or no change] and have been removed from poverty.
yes inequality has dropped - what this means is we are all poorer basically- not the rich obviously as we gave them a tax cut

Stoner Tut tut You know better than to massage the figures - was that deliberate?

As ernie says it is better than folk think that 31% of income goes on foreign aid , that 24 % of benefits is fraud rather than 2.3%. It helps that they think we spend more on benefits than on pensions for if they knew the truth they would not be as keen to vilify.

I would imagine that those who control the media and the agenda are delighted about the degree of ignorance amongst the general public and are busty patting themselves on the back for convincing so many folk of their mistruths

OT it would be interesting to see what the public thought the cut % was

It says here that the unions will never learn
It says here that the economy is on the upturn
And it says here we should be proud
That we are free
And our free press reflects our democracy

Those braying voices on the right of the house
Are echoed down the street of shame
Where politics mix with bingo and tits
In a strictly money and numbers game

Where they offer you a feature
On stockings and suspenders
Next to a call for stiffer penalties for sex offenders

It says here that this year's prince is born
It says here do you ever wish
That you were better informed
And it says here that we can only stop the rot
With a large dose of law and order
And a touch of the short sharp shock

If this does not reflect you view you should understand
That those who own the papers also own this land
And they'd rather you believe
In coronation street capers
In the war of circulation, it sells newspapers
Could it be an infringement
Of the freedom of the press
To print pictures of women in states of undress

When you wake up to the fact
That you paper is tory
Just remember, there are two sides to every story

Sir William Bragg nails it, almost 30 years ago; how little has actually changed...

Hardly surprising given the government has been deliberately miss-leading the public to ensure that they do think that we are wasting billions on things like immigrants / benefits so they can scape goat the oppressed for every problem...

No it's not a conspiracy. There is nothing illegal or secretive about politicians and newspapers such as the Daily Mail deliberately misinforming the public to satisfy a political agenda. Indeed it is to be fully expected.

Being "economical with the truth", or even straightforward lying, is not the definition of a conspiracy.

The Tory ideology has very little to do with economics. Never has. It's about increasing inequality, making the rich massively richer, while punishing the poor for being poor. The people who own the media are rich and getting massively richer as a result of their policies

Spend has gone up under Gideon as it did under thatcher but is being spent on the consequences of their ideology- increased welfare to pay people to be unemployed. not on good stuff I.e. investment for the future such as infrastructure and training because you can't have an interventionist industrial policy. absolutely not. no. Also much of that public spend is being transferred to a smaller and smaller number of private individuals.

Thatcher spaffed the North Sea oil legacy on long term disability payments to massage the unemployed figures.

Thing is, your welfare payments to the workless actually isn't that much as part of the whole (or even as part of social security spending as a whole). They don't make a big song and dance about slashing "spare bedroom subsidy" and getting the dying certified fit for work because it saves significant amounts of money, it doesn't. It's the show hand - the magician waves that one in your face with a flourish so you don't watch what he's stuffing up his sleeve with the other.

The bankers got mighty narked when they were "demonised" for, what, six months or so after the wheels fell off, and now normal service is resumed.

By the way - all the problems in the NHS? I don't reckon it's really because of all them immigrants, either.

The Tory ideology has very little to do with economics. Never has. It's about increasing inequality, making the rich massively richer, while punishing the poor for being poor. The people who own the media are rich and getting massively richer as a result of their policies

Not rocket science is it?

No, but you still manage to get it wrong.

Thatcher explained it well in the house when the Labour opposition accused her of making the rich richer and the poor poorer.
She kindly pointed out that everyone, rich or poor was better off.

Labour ideology is making everyone poorer, would you rather have that than a greater disparity of wealth?
Smacks of cutting one's nose off to spite one's face.

I've had the conversation with lefties before where I have pointed out that I was better off under the last Tory Gov than the last Lab Gov.
For this I get called a selfish Tory.
Except I am by pretty much anyone's definition, poor.
So who are Labour actually good for?
Themselves, like most politicians.

The Labour Party is pointless. Your missing the point. We now have a political 'class' with the same ideology. I just despise the Tories so much as they're clearly enjoying themselves in the process. Look at gideons smug self satisfied face as he announces yet more cuts to hit the poor hardest. They're ****s basically. Of the highest order!

I think the Labour Party under Ed Millipede are certainly useless, but only as they've decided not to stand for anything and just copy the Tories. Hopefully they'll kick Ed out and get his brother in (or anyone else for that matter) and start to offer an alternative.